Skip to main content

About your Search

English 30
Search Results 0 to 29 of about 30 (some duplicates have been removed)
. one is whether corporationses have this right and, secondly, if they don't, as corporations, can the individual owners assert freedom of religion claims? by the way, on hobby lobby, they don't say we reject the entire contraceptive mandate. what they say is four elements of it. four things. two versions of the morning after pill, two kinds of iuds they say would be tantamount to abortion, so they don't want to provide coverage for them. but, you're right. it's a question the supreme court has never before addre addressed. does a for profit corporation, can it object to a federal law based on religious freedom? it's never answered that before, so that's one of the reasons why this is a big teal. >> yeah, a very big deal if they haven't answered it. and when you talk to obama administration officials and the folks at the justice department, they feel they went out of their way to exempt purely religious nonprofit institutions. they really wanted to leave some space for them and that goes to the question that you always lack at in these oral arguments is the justices want to know wh
, if corporations can decide willy-nilly they don't want to abide by this, religious organizations are probably seen in a different light, this thing won't really have any teeth by the time -- if it gets passed. it won't be effective. i'll read a quote from the "huffington post." the catholic school teacher who has done a great job for years could still be fired under enda if the school's principals discover she's a lesbian. we don't wantened, a as how far we've come but view it as a sign of how much further we need to go. what do you make of that? >> they are definitely creating unique carve-outs in civil rights law that are not applied in other areas. supporters do have to walk a fine line trying to bring republicans in, the senate and house floor and not creating a useless piece of legislation that really doesn't create any kind of enforceable mechanism to avoid discrimination. >> i just think, steve, this is a year in the last three months the pope in september came out and said, who am i to judge a gay person of goodwill who seeks the lord. if the pope can say that, why does it remain so diffic
? is it to throw all -- i don't know how many more hands you can have on deck. maybe people from kayak and but how does the white house deal with this? >> i think more issa hearings would be very useful for the white house. every time these guys seem to be going under water, issa throws them a life raft. it's amazing to me the extent to which he keeps making the same mistake over and over again. i think in general, and my colleague wrote a story this morning which makes this point as well, is to keep the president as far away from this mess as possible. we see them throwing a new person under the bus every day. henry chow, marilyn tavenner. i think the key is to sort of create this, i think, an illusion of collective irresponsibility as opposed to having a buck stops here moment. >> that's interesting. you think they would just keep president obama isolated, have other people take the fall as it were, even if no one gets fired. but this is part of actual strategy. >> yeah, and also -- and i think "the washington post" reported just to change the benchmarks constantly. we're going to k
don't think you can tell what will happen next year. i'll tell you this, democrats stand tall in support of the affordable care act. >> indeed, to all the skeptics and naysayers, fur or over glitches to hurricane katrina and iraq, perhaps a little perspective is in order. new york magazines advises if every one of obama's katrina's were katrina america would no longer exist and we'd live in a watery hellscape. joining me today, the columnist for "the daily beast," the columnist, there are many columnist, but the only one to read on "the daily beast," sally cohn, political writer brian boiler, former white house press secretary and founding partners of insight agency robert gibbs and syndicated columnist for "the washington post" kathleen parker. joining us from seattle washington, washington state insurance commissioner. mike, before i get to you, i want to get our folks in new york on the record here. robert, specifically, 80% isn't good enough? >> in baseball you'd be in the hall of fame twice. >> also baseball with like 50%. >> you would. i think it's a measure of improveme
having some of those vacancies filled could mean some of those cases don't get to the supreme court. we don't think about it that way. >> on the clarence thomas and scalia thing, chuck grassley saying, you know, you better be careful what you wish to, more clarence thomases and scalias. they made it through confirmation. they are not like fabrication of chuck grassley's mind. >> although they seem to be at some point fabrications of conservative means. >> kasie, i wonder what the dynamic on the hill is. part of the functionality were gentlemen's agreements everybody would color inside the line. this is called a nuclear option because it's seen as a drastic measure. i wonder if it erodes any goodwill or bipartisanship that may be any shreds of that that still linger in the halls of capitol hill. >> this move by senate majority leader harry reid is not going to do anything to bring the temperature down here. this is just sort of turning it up and cranking a little further. the reality is that the number of senators who remember being on the other side of the coin either remember what it's
in the nation to change the outcome of decisions and rubber stamp the administration's expansive policies, i don't know what else you'd call it other than court packing. >> that is correct. nominations for empty court seats are tantamount to jamming the judicial branch. not only does this republican obstruction create havoc, it has the added bonus of undermining constitutional authority of the president of the united states. in reality, if anyone is court packing, it's actually senate republicans. writes salon, republicans are denying or threatening to deny confirmation to any nominees in order to nullify laws, stymy legitimate policymaking and reverse pac, keep liberal judges off one key appellate court in order to conserve its conservative balance for as long as possible. joining me today senior writer for "politico" magazine glen thrush, host of disrupt karen finney and writer from the "washington post" sam stein. wonderful people. thank you for joining me this friday of fridays. glen has more time with these slacky magazine deadlines. >> packed the court. >> we have talked. i think there's n
. your colleagues on the senate, foreign relations and elsewhere are saying, hey, we don't truss these guys. >> we shouldn't trust them. the inspections regime is the key piece to this deal. again, remember when prime minister netanyahu was before the united nations, he was talking about the amount of enriched uranium iran had at the 20% level. the 20% enrichment will be disabled and basically rolled back. enrichment will be capped at 5%. that means it will take them longer to get to weapons grade. the real key is the dramatic increase in the inspections by these objective and independent international inspectors. we already, ari, remember, have good intelligence. our intelligence and other allied nations about what's going on in iran. what we get now is our own continuing intelligence plus this intrusive inspections regime. so we will have an earlier warning if iran decides to violate their agreements and move forward. what i expect to see congress talking about is clearly are there additional sanctions we should capitol plate if iran at the end of this interim period has not st
took place. >> i don't recall significant discussions around some of the verbiage on this to be 100% honest with you. >> do you agree it was a wrong move? >> certainly. >> one former senior administration official said the law is crafted by white house and lawmakers, some white house policy advisers objected to breadth of keep your plan promise. they were overruled by political aides. that is true? >> that is not my recollection at all of that. >> in the end it is likely with so many aca problems, the intentions may have been good but execution was flawed. as former white house speechwriter john favro told "wall street journal," the aim was to make it as simple as possible while still being true. editor of the magazine, politics business insider josh barrow and co-host of nbc's the cycle ari melber. joining me from d.c. the white house reporter julia halperin. congratulations on a big story who reads in many ways like whodoneit. heartbreaking if you're a fan of in insuring millions of uninsured americans. one thing i noticed throughout the piece that you guys ran this weekend was th
investments and the ground game, the use of data and analytics. i don't in talking to republicans at the national or local level see a lot of people who have developed the expertise to do that. this is difficult, sophisticated stuff. your normal sort of political operative staffer types don't have the skill set to do it. in the wake of the democrat's loss in 2004, they invest in a lot of new institutions to house data, do analysis, do testing at great costs that existed on the left. nobody on the right has taken that type of leap yet. >> in terms of the campaign itself, governor, the surrogate issue in virginia was -- has been an interesting one. terry mcauliffe has had the assistance of bill and hillary clinton. he the vice president and president stumping for him. cuccinelli has had marco rubio, ron paul, rick santorum and the duggers. you talk about a dearth of leadership and effective emissa emissaries, this would ab case study. "politico" striking contrast in surrogates in the homestretch of virginia governor's race another reminder gop's larger leadership vacuum and civil wa
the fundamental principles of the law. this is democrats playing into the hands of republicans who don't want to fix it. they want to forget about it, destroy it hook, line, sinker. what the president did was he was able to retake the high ground. look, no more gotcha games. lets focus on implementing the law. lets come together and implement the law. allows him to point his finger and point at the republicans who have made lie after lie after lie after lie about obama care and have not apologized, have doubled down on the lies, death panels or socialized medicine. at a certain point, they have to be held for their lies. >> i feel like this is deeply cynical of me, karen. i think all this television made me into a cynic. >> help me. help me help myself. the problem i see is that republicans don't really care, you know. they will use the tools at their disposal regardless of how bad they may be for the country, and they are going to sort of market this as a failure even if it ends up being a success. >> the positive that i will throw out at you, i think finally this president, this white house
today? how are you on the panic meter of one to ten? >> i'm not too excited and i don't get too panicked. we've got to fix things. that's what i came here to do. the people of west virginia expect me to make it better and i'm going to do that. the bottom line is they messed up, they messed up royally. there's no excuse for this. i'm not trying to make excuses. i sure don't want to go back to what we had before, one serious or catastrophic illness away from bankruptcy, a child with a defect couldn't get on their parents or someone with a pre-existing condition couldn't get insured or someone too sick said their only option was to die. that's not who we are as americans. this thing is messed up. can we fix it? absolutely. if we work together. my goodness, seems like everyone is working against each other not wanting to see if we can get a better health care system that's affordable and accessible that's going to work. >> we know democrats have been on the front lines in this battle. a few weeks ago there was talk on capitol hill the white house had really not done well by their soldiers in
. they don't always get it right. warren turned out to be a liberal, another a conservative. one thing is presidents can't read minds. >> right. >> i think they got to the point you don't have to filibuster, just derail legislation, put holds on things. to me the worst case was ted cruz over the summer saying there will be no meeting of the budget committees. >> nothing. >> then a government shutdown was easily engineered on the that point. there's so many things wrong today. why do they have weekly luncheons, partisanship, not legislation. used to be the chairs of the committee led the legislative discussions in a fairly bipartisan way. the chairs made decisions. now it's the parties make decisions. the decision if you're an opposition party is no. >> look, i've got to ask you standing as you are on capitol hill, "the washington post" in an he had tarle said this radical action, the nuclear option, a product of poisonous partisanship will be an accelerant of poisonous partisanship. there's been a lot of postgame analysis today that said if it was broken yesterday it will be more broke
them some evidence -- >> i don't know. do they? i feel like fox news has had an easy time of finding bad examples. >> then you call them and they're like, oh, i didn't know i was eligible for this. it's easy to find bad examples if you don't care about the facts. >> but narrative in this counts. part of this is proving to americans that this health insurance is a good thing, that they can actually enroll in it using a computer or a paper form, which will actually still take a long time. and if you don't have enough people buy into the notion that this thing is functioning, then the whole thing can fail. if you look at the enrollment goals, and i'm personally sort of terrified when the white house does release the numbers later this month. the goal is 800,000 by november 30th. i am not a mathematician, but that number, given the fact that six people were able to enroll on the first day, could be dreadfully lower than 800,000. >> and i would add an extra terrifying target. they need 40% of the enrollees to be young people. that demographic is particularly critical. that's the demograph
it for now, even if you don't actually like it. yesterday in an attempt to staunch the bleeding from the disastrous health care rollout, president obama announced a fix that would allow people to continue their plans under the health care rollout for a year. if it was a policy solution to a political problem, it was also a mea culpa. >> there is no doubt people are frustrated. i would be, too. i was not informed correctly that the website would not be working the way it was supposed to. had i been informed, i wouldn't be going out saying this is great. we did fumble the ball on it. what i'm going to make sure we do is get it fixed. >> unfortunately the president is looking to recover the fumble. because if you like it, you still might not be able to keep it. it's even hard for me to get out. although the new proposal laos insurers to keep people on existing and substandard plans, it does not necessarily mean insurers or individual states will agree to it. president obama is meeting today with insurance ceos to discuss ways to work together in a conversation that is guaranteed to
to give people health care. you're trying to take it away. >> i think mcgovern is on point there. lets don't forget already millions of people who didn't have health care, younger people, people with young children with pre-existing conditions. there are people hold have been thrown off their health care because of caps, lifetime caps who are seriously ill, who can't be thrown off. insurance companies can't spend vast sums of money on bonuses and administrative fees. if they do, they have to give money back. all of these things are already in place and this what the republican party wants to roll back. they apparently thought the old system -- >> taken away. >> i think, julie, dav joy, daf brought this it, it's around insurance instead of care. the crassness, lets continue to allow insurers to offer substandard plans that could bankrupt them, leave them with massive bills is morally bankrupt. >> if i worked for the insurance, i would give my entire public relations department a 100% raise and double the fees to my lobbyists. what we're seeing in the bill from fred upton, republican from bl
it into a coy and you have responsibilities and rights. you don't get to have it both ways. these cases are likely going to be decided not on the basis of citizens united or a first amendment argument but on the religious freedom restoration act which was passed by congress in the early '90s. i think what they have to show is -- they have to prove two things in order for these private employers to be able to deny their employees contraception. they have to show that a corporation can even have religious liberty, which is certainly a stretch, that it has absolutely no basis and precedent, citizens united aside. it would be an enormously radical thing to say a corporation has a religious exercise. then they would also have to show that women, that their employees accessing birth control is a burden on that and the government's compelling interest doesn't supersede that. >> and i want to get to the politics, because we've seen the politics over the last couple weeks about the nuclear option and judges. one of the things i think this case underlines and underscores is that judges matter, pa
and telephone lines. that's what should happen. i don't think back off any of this. make a solution available. if they have to throw the web cover over the side, we did social security on telephone lines. they shoould not back off. the bill is a joke, which gets i rid of insurance reforms which help ordinary americans. >> you think he could have with stood senate democrats, diane feinstein, mary landrieu. >> the guy has a pen worth two-thirds of the vote in the senate and house. if you want to make it work, be tough and hard-nosed about it. he's not going to run for re-election. if it's me, my popularity goes down to 10%, what do i care. it worked in massachusetts. 98.5% of all massachusetts citizens have health care. he bought this, it's his. he ought to make it work. it can work but not with this website. >> the one issue is not what he's fixing or, in my view politically isn't the biggest problem, it's the fact this promise he made dozens of times isn't true. >> that's a function of the website failure. the website doesn't fail -- these insurance people's policies getting rejected, they ar
. they describe you as aggressive, abrasive and arrogant. >> i don't know you can believe everything you read. >> any one of those. can you believe any one of those? >> what i'm trying to do is do my job. occasionally people don't like that. joining me managing director of global strategy group and former senior advisers to priorities usa action bill burton. congressional reporter from buzz feed, josh green, senior national correspondent from bloomberg business week, which this week looks at the twitter ipo and white house correspondent for npr ari shapiro. ari, i have to ask you, the view from the white house, the suggestion, mere suggestion that the exchanges may not be ready on november 30th is sending shudders down the spines of not just progressives but americans in general. >> it's one thing to say we're going to get it up as soon as we can, asap. when you set a date, november 309, as they said repeatedly then you need to have it running by november 30th. they are wholly dependent on jeff science, whose one job it is to get things going. as president obama said i wish i could write code
accounts, 42 and 44 are not close. advisers can see the two men don't particularly like each other, and their relationship is purely transactional. as reported in the book "double down," following a round of golf in 2011, designed to break the ice and formalize clinton's role in the re-election effort, president obama told an aide, i like him in doses. clinton's recent comment that the president should allow americans to keep their substandard individual insurance plans was just the most recent example of the big dog running off the leash. in june clinton opined that president obama risked looking like a total fool with his cautious, consensus-seeking approach on syria. during the campaign, clinton praised mitt romney's sterling business career just as team obama was spending millions defining romney as a corporate raider. clinton announced democrats should accept a temporary extension of the bush tax cuts, directly contradicting the obama campaign platform. "new york" magazine writes, organizing skittish red-state senators is one thing. organizing bill clinton is another. indeed,
money bags, we don't care about what happens to the rest of the world party. >> i think republicans are quite aware of the persona when you look at polling and public perception. i don't think principles will change, 2014, 2016, where it stands on tacks, sbiltment reform. when you look at paul ryan, went to miami, ohio, come out of a blue-collar manufacturing-based states. that new style is going to be put on top of the gop's traditional policy. >> sarah palin and ted cruz were asked -- rick perry asked about chris christie, asked to endorse him. nobody likes to endorse a potential rival. you get a sense there's a fundamental split behind the kind of politics chris christie practices and the kind of politics ted cruz and sarah palin and rick perry. >> he says on paper they are similar to ted cruz and sarah palin. he's pro-life, supportive of traditional marriage. on the economic issues he's right in line with the american line. the presentation, that's what christie is talking about. something like divided government christie talks about the need to govern rather than combative. tha
Search Results 0 to 29 of about 30 (some duplicates have been removed)